Anti-Gun Lunatics Take Over the Asylum

Instead of undoing reckless policies that have allowed dangerous mentally ill people to roam free, President Obama is using the bloody Newtown massacre to target Americans’ fundamental right to self-defense.

Determined not to let the senseless murder of at least 20 young schoolchildren and six adults by a madman last Friday in Connecticut go to waste, the nation’s Demagogue-in-Chief is taking aim at the Second Amendment by urging a reinstatement of the useless federal Assault Weapons Ban.

The Assault Weapons Ban, enacted during the Clinton era, prohibited civilian use of specific semi-automatic firearms that politicians arbitrarily deemed “assault weapons” for superficial reasons largely unrelated to how they operate. As Daniel Greenfield wisely put it, an assault rifle “is some sort of mysterious weapon forged in the fires of hell solely for the purpose of murdering people.” The ban, which had no measurable impact on crime, expired in 2004 and attempts to revive the nebulous law have failed so far.

The rifle that the reportedly mentally ill perpetrator, Adam Lanza, primarily relied on was a .223-caliber Bushmaster M4 carbine, which was apparently allowed under the federal ban and under Connecticut’s own assault weapon ban.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said in addition to banning assault weapons Obama supports a proposal to close the misleadingly named “gun show loophole,” which allows people to conduct private secondary-market gun transactions without submitting to background checks. Crime expert John Lott, author of  the groundbreaking book, “More Guns, Less Crime,” told radio host Mark Levin last night that such private trades are almost nonexistent, amounting to just seven-tenths of one percent of all gun transactions nationwide.

Obama is “interested in looking at” restricting high-capacity ammunition clips, Carney said, along with social and mental health issues associated with gun-related violence.

Of course sharp-witted cynics might reply that left-wingers consider any desire to own a gun to be prima facie proof of mental illness.

Leftists across the fruited plain have gone apoplectic in light of last week’s multiple murders. TV talking heads Piers Morgan, Soledad O’Brien, and Martin Bashir have been particularly obnoxious, cutting off and shouting down guests who defend Second Amendment rights.

In recent days any principled defense of the Second Amendment has raised howls of indignation from affective, sheltered so-called progressives who wouldn’t know the difference between a Glock and a glockenspiel. Even more than usual, reasonable debate is not possible with leftists who mere days ago were cheering labor union violence aimed at preventing Michigan from becoming a “right to work” state.

Those on the Left seem completely unaware that, with the backing of groups like the ever-litigious American Civil Liberties Union screaming about the so-called rights of disturbed individuals, they helped to lay the foundation for future waves of mass shootings in America.

As Clayton Cramer writes, mass murders had been relatively rare in the United States until the 1980s. Although it was “fashionable to blame gun availability for this dramatic increase … guns did not become more available” before multiple-victim shootings started to become increasingly common.

“At least half of these mass murderers (as well as many other murderers) have histories of mental illness,” says Cramer.

“Many have already come to the attention of the criminal justice or mental health systems before they become headlines. In the early 1980s, there were about two million chronically mentally ill people in the United States, with 93 percent living outside mental hospitals. The largest diagnosis for the chronically mentally ill is schizophrenia, which afflicts about 1 percent of the population, or about 1.5 percent of adult Americans.”

But in the late 1950s, egged on by newfangled theories, the nation began deinstitutionalizing psychiatric patients, moving them from long-term wards in state mental hospitals to community-based mental health facilities. Often patients refused to take prescribed medications and became homeless.

Back in the 1960s the strange behavior reportedly exhibited by Lanza probably would have warranted an involuntary stay at a mental hospital. But after deinstitutionalization, such psychiatric patients were left at liberty, fending for themselves in society, until they killed someone, Cramer writes.

“There is a clear statistical relationship between deinstitutionalization and murder rates,” he writes. “Violent crime rates rose dramatically in the 1960s, most worrisomely in the murder rate.”

But even if Americans didn’t live in an era of “deinstitutionalization” today, Lanza probably would have been able to pull off his killing spree.

If a new report from Fox News is accurate, a critical social safeguard that might have protected society from the shooter failed. Lanza “may have snapped because his mother was planning to commit him to a psychiatric facility,” according to Fox.

Adam Lanza, 20, targeted Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown after killing his mother early Friday because he believed she loved the school “more than she loved him,” said Joshua Flashman, 25, who grew up not far from where the shooting took place. Flashman, a U.S. Marine, is the son of a pastor at an area church where many of the victims’ families worship.

“From what I’ve been told, Adam was aware of her petitioning the court for conservatorship and (her) plans to have him committed,” Flashman told FoxNews.com.

“Adam was apparently very upset about this. He thought she just wanted to send him away. From what I understand, he was really, really angry. I think this could have been it, what set him off.”

A senior law enforcement official involved in the investigation confirmed that Lanza’s anger at his mother over plans for “his future mental health treatment” is being looked at as a possible motive for the deadly shooting.

If Lanza’s mother was indeed trying to do the right thing by getting her son psychiatric help, her efforts failed when he shot her to death. Presumably no one and no law could have stopped Lanza before he opened fire at the schoolhouse.

Meanwhile, some left-wingers are now claiming that President Obama is a friend of the Second Amendment and that all he wants to do is to impose some supposedly reasonable restrictions in order to save lives.

Don’t believe it.

Let’s recap what Obama actually believes, as opposed to his official actions as president.

Obama has a well-documented history of anti-gun fanaticism.

During his time teaching at the University of Chicago, he told then-colleague John Lott point-blank: “I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.”

As a candidate for the Illinois State Senate in 1996, Obama promised to ban “the manufacture, sale & possession of handguns.”

While running for the U.S. Senate in 2004, Obama spoke in favor of heavy-handed (and no doubt unconstitutional) federal legislation to block citizens nationwide from receiving concealed-carry permits. “National legislation will prevent other states’ flawed concealed-weapons laws from threatening the safety of Illinois residents,” he said.

Obama supported the District of Columbia’s draconian near-total ban on handgun ownership that was struck down in the Supreme Court’s landmark 2008 ruling in D.C. v. Heller.

On the presidential campaign trail Obama all but labeled gun owners as crazies. He revealed his contempt toward average gun-owning Americans, infamously describing small-town Pennsylvanians as people who bitterly cling to their guns and religion.

As Obama’s defenders delight in pointing out, gun policy has become less restrictive at the national level during his administration, albeit ever so slightly. Obama signed legislation allowing guns to be stowed in luggage on Amtrak trains and to be carried concealed on some federal parkland.

Of course this doesn’t prove Obama in his heart supports the Second Amendment. Rather, it shows that even statist demagogues can have the good sense to pick their battles carefully in a country with a long, proud history of firearms ownership dating back hundreds of years.

But with Obama now safely ensconced in the White House for another four years, there is no reason for him to hold back.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Matthew Vadum

    Author's note for the record:

    The below four paragraphs are taken directly from the Fox News article but through an error have not been marked as such. I have asked for the situation to be remedied. -MV

    Adam Lanza, 20, targeted Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown after killing his mother early Friday because he believed she loved the school “more than she loved him,” said Joshua Flashman, 25, who grew up not far from where the shooting took place. Flashman, a U.S. Marine, is the son of a pastor at an area church where many of the victims’ families worship.

    “From what I’ve been told, Adam was aware of her petitioning the court for conservatorship and (her) plans to have him committed,” Flashman told FoxNews.com.

    “Adam was apparently very upset about this. He thought she just wanted to send him away. From what I understand, he was really, really angry. I think this could have been it, what set him off.”

    A senior law enforcement official involved in the investigation confirmed that Lanza’s anger at his mother over plans for “his future mental health treatment” is being looked at as a possible motive for the deadly shooting.

    • Mary Sue

      interesting. I guess she couldn't get him committed quickly enough. Footdragging by the authorities that maybe didn't take her seriously enough?

      • http://www.adinakutnicki.com AdinaK

        And the bane of all things related to the mentally ill, HIPA's INSANE privacy rules, is to the detriment of all those who need protection from the seriously ill, yet it is not even addressed. This is simply because keeping citizens safe is not the left's concern, regardless of their crocodile tears!!

        And if an administration is gunning for the Second Amendment, what better way to do so than when a country is most vulnerable, both economically and emotionally.

        Again, radical revolutionaries do what they do best, and average folks would do well to remember this <a href="http://-http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/07/when-authentic-revolutionaries-hold-the-reins-of-american-power-centers-via-the-most-radical-regime-in-u-s-history-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/” target=”_blank”>-http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/07/when-authentic-revolutionaries-hold-the-reins-of-american-power-centers-via-the-most-radical-regime-in-u-s-history-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/

        And it is only through understanding the backgrounds, and ideologies, of those who seek to strip Americans of their legally, Constitutionally sanctioned arms that one can begin to understand them AND fight them.

        Adina Kutnicki, Israel – <a href="http://www.adinakutnicki.com/about/” target=”_blank”>www.adinakutnicki.com/about/

    • tagalog

      The guy was a grown man, 20 years old, and he was murderously angry because he thought Mommy -who provided him with a home at that late date in his life- didn't love him enough?

      You know, I used to think my mom was clueless when she said "all those people who spend time contemplating their navels would be better off if they just moved out, got a job and a place of their own." As in so many other things, she was also right about that.

      We need to get rid of the Donaldson case and the "danger to self or others" standard for involuntary commitment for observation. It's better that a small group of people who are potentially homicidally disturbed lose a short period of their freedom than that hundreds of millions of Americans get their Second Amendment rights permanently trampled on.

      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

        A senior citizen said they used to have town owned poor farms. If you didnt' have money for a place of your own you could stay there and have a garden or livestock as long as you cared for it. If this guy had gotten out of his mom's basement and earned some self respect, could this story have had a different ending?

        • JacksonPearson

          The experts will be kept busy with this case for a long time. But to jump on guns and the 2nd Amendment is a poor excuse for knee jerking!

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "A senior citizen said they used to have town owned poor farms. If you didnt' have money for a place of your own you could stay there and have a garden or livestock as long as you cared for it. If this guy had gotten out of his mom's basement and earned some self respect, could this story have had a different ending?"

          I think so. Selfish people love the federal government doing things because they envision so many other people to help share the burden. They then forget from one day to the next just how many burdens they expect the federal government to "fix." The other factor is that community based programs inspire envy when your leaders use class warfare tactics to win elections. Therefore "victims" (who see themselves that way) and victim culture communities will always cry about how unfair it is not to tax everyone so that they have "social justice" rather than wondering about the best approach to fix any given problem.

          Virtually any service that can be pushed back to state or local level should be. That alone will generally lead to better services. Mental health and homeless services too. I imagine people pay too much federal taxes in many cases to consider maintaining local community farms after the federal government also says they have the ideal program to solve the problem.

          What a joke we've let leftists make out of our government and it's performance. The communists lost the USSR, but won on many fronts here. The cold war has merely entered a new phase.

    • JacksonPearson

      There are any number of single, or combinations of issues that could be the cause and affect of people like Adam Lanza to unleash their vengeance on society. e.g., Rap music, video games, peer pressure and taunting, violent movies, gang revenge, behavioral medications, words like "bring a gun to a knife fight," etc.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "There are any number of single, or combinations of issues that could be the cause and affect of people like Adam Lanza to unleash their vengeance on society. e.g., Rap music, video games, peer pressure and taunting, violent movies, gang revenge, behavioral medications, words like "bring a gun to a knife fight," etc."

        Anger from a sense of entitlement due to his communist-corrupted education…

        • JacksonPearson

          Barack Obama will never let a TV camera, photo op, or crisis go to waste. Yet, he's making sure his Muslim Brorherhood friends in the Middle East are getting the latest, and most lethal weaponry to defeat existing governments…let's not forget "Fast and Furious" assault rifles to Mexican drug cartels.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Barack Obama will never let a TV camera, photo op, or crisis go to waste. Yet, he's making sure his Muslim Brorherhood friends in the Middle East are getting the latest, and most lethal weaponry to defeat existing governments…let's not forget "Fast and Furious" assault rifles to Mexican drug cartels."

            It's obvious to anyone informed about this that 0'Bama is fighting a war between good and evil, on the side of evil.

          • JacksonPearson

            Obama's an epic failure. I don't think he knows the difference between good or evil, right or wrong, up or down, right or left. To me, the man's mind is cross threaded.

  • Bimbam

    Wherever you find human misery and suffering you’ll find a liberal at the helm.

    These Demoncrap liberals are very wicked people, either knowingly or unknowingly. Let me explain.

    As the writer said they declare “gun-free zones” inviting massacres, then they teach our children (according to Dennis Prager) self-esteem and moral relativism instead of plain right and wrong. So when things do not go right for these kids high on self-esteem mind-bending psychotropic drugs and lacking any moral discipline they pick up guns (that Republicans and Conservatives value for self-defense) and start shooting the defenseless.

    Then “they” people like oBama, and Diane Frank Enstein blame the Republican’s weapons for the shooting. It’s all a diabolical operation.

    • Headed4TheHills

      Well, Bimbam, you just need to understand the Liberal Progressive agenda.
      It's not about the guns, per se, it's about control. LibPros think they are smarter, more enlightened, and all-round better than everyone else. Think "Animal Farm": All are created equal, but some are more equal than others. They want to control our lives but to do that they have to take certain steps.
      One – get as many people dependent on Big Gov as possible: welfare, Section 8 housing, free health care, etc. When you do that, then those people will give you power to keep the freebies rolling in.
      Two – take control of educating the future generations. Public education (AKA Liberal Indoctrination Centers) has become all touchy-feely with Self-esteem building exercises, consensus answers instead of right answers and wrong answers, and altering history to suit their agenda. Hitler himself once said, "Give me the minds of the youth and I can mold the future." Once you do that, you have continuing power.
      Three – bread and circuses. Dispense with free choice and dictate what people should eat (food pyramid and laws against drink sizes). Dispense with educational programming on television and give the masses "reality TV". More programming of the mind to maintain power by keeping the sheeple dull-witted but able-bodied grunt workers.
      Four – demonize those who differ in opinion. Should someone take a stand against your policies,don't engage in meaningful dialog. Tear 'em down. Call 'em racist, bigoted, homophobic, knuckle-draggin' Bible-thumpin' gun-totin' rednecks. Doesn't matter if their viewpoint is accurate if you can make them look bad. The LIC have programmed the sheeple to believe the party line. Remember, tell a lie often enough and people start believing it. Think "Palestinians".
      Five – marginalize 'em. Once you've got sheeple thinking you're the cat's meow and your opponent is Satan incarnate, start telling people that your opponent is only a small number of people and shouldn't be listened to. Doesn't matter the actual numbers involved, perception is everything. "Why, if all these people are saying the same thing, they just have to be right. Right?"

      Once you understand the LibPro Doctrine, you'll be able to pick it out in everyday news and TV programming, newspapers, magazines,Internet blogs, etc. Real eye-opener, I tells ya.

      • Bimbam

        I know one of the techniques is to ridicule your opponent. I see this on the blogs all the time. As I like to point out, so passe’, so immature.

        Liberals are children in charge. And you notice a lot are women? The Bible says because of sin He would give women and children to lead U.S.

        • Mary Sue

          The irony is Liberals like to call anyone that disagrees with them, on ANY issue whatsover, be it gun control, or Islamization, "crazy" and thus they dismiss the opposition as the "inane ravings of a lunatic that doesn't inhabit reality'.

    • Questions

      This is absurd. Liberalism didn't emerge as a political force anywhere in the world until the late-19th century. So there was no evil and suffering before then? Get real.

      • Bimbam

        As a matter of fact there was. Liberalism is not a political farce, it is a WAY OF THINKING! it actually began with Adam & Eve. The first liberals to gain access to this thinking.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "This is absurd. Liberalism didn't emerge as a political force anywhere in the world until the late-19th century. So there was no evil and suffering before then? Get real."

        Whoa. They're not the historical source, but they flock to it these days to exploit it even in cases where they didn't originally create it. Think of the relationship with Islam, which is 14 centuries old, and then tell me that liberals have no connections with Islam, Muslims as de facto victims of "colonialism" and so forth.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Then "they" people like oBama, and Diane Frank Enstein blame the Republican’s weapons for the shooting. It’s all a diabolical operation."

      Eventually, according to liberal leftists, all evil in history can be traced back to the "god delusion" created and maintained by the Jews and Christians, and by people who need to evolve more. Once they get rid of the first world trouble-makers, they can handle the third world "others" while waiting for their "inevitable" evolution (Muslims, Africans, etc.)…to their Utopian ideals of course.

  • ApolloSpeaks

    ABORTION AND BANNING GUNS IN MORALLY CRAZY AMERICA

    What are innocent children infrequently killed by gunfire in savage mass murder attacks compared to the holocaust of unborn children-one million a year-brutally murdered in abortion clinics? Which is worse? A senseless AK-47 that can’t shoot itself (and is neither good nor evil) but can be used to protect life from killers or take it in crime? Or an abortion doctor serially killing one unborn baby after another on a deadly assembly line? Now I’m no more for killing abortion doctors for their evil practices and crimes than are people on the Left for killing gun manufacturers or retailers who do nothing wrong when selling guns to law abiding citizens. But those who want to uphold the laws that keep mass murdering abortion clinics and doctors in business-and a president who pours out his heart over young Newtown victims but believes in live birth abortions (the most heinous kind)-are hypocritical for wanting to ban guns, any guns, because they could be used to kill innocent children or anyone. Where’s the moral sanity in this?

    • Questions

      A number of articles in the wake of this mass murder have posited the "link" between this event and the right to abortion. Aside from the highly tenuous connection, I find this argument an obnoxious exploitation of tragedy for political gain.

      By the way, there was plenty of abortion in this country prior to Roe v. Wade. That's pretty much why the case reached the Supreme Court in the first place.

      • Western Canadian

        Actually, estimates of the rate of abortion varied from 1 in 3 to 1 in 50. No effort made to find out what the actual rate was, was ignored. The religon hating loon who started the legal abortion racket made up figures out of thin air, lied through his teeth, and what passed for a news media at the time was as worthless as the current version, PC to the core. In Canada, the equivelant con artists and criminals actually claimed a very high figure for woman dying of illegal abortion. Not just having, but dying. They got carried away, and supplied figures that exceeded the total deaths from ALL causes of women of child-bearing age. Should have destroyed their cred, but it didn’t, our new media is as worthless as yours.

        In Canada, when things didn’t go the abortion rackets way in court…. they resorted to jury tampering and intimidation…. And if you were not in Montreal that week, you didn’t hear a word about it.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    "Even more than usual, reasonable debate is not possible with leftists who mere days ago were cheering labor union violence aimed at preventing Michigan from becoming a “right to work” state."

    Sigh. It's pathetic and exhausting dealing with lunatics all year 'round.

    • tagalog

      Even better, after the Newtown shootings, some libbies were calling for the execution of the leaders of the NRA. Talk about paranoid schizophrenia pushing one into murderous fantasies that might become murderous acts…

  • amicus101

    I do not live in the USA. In my own country I am a Conservative. I often agree with the articles on this site, but when the issue of gun control arises, I have to part company with you. Guns are dangerous. they are not toys and need to be treated with respect, not sold over the counter without checks. Firearms licences should only be issued to fit persons and their fitness needs to be rigorously assessed and certificates refused to unsuitable people.

    The issue of what we call "care in the community" is also important, but if mentally ill people did not have the means of laying their hands so readily on deadly weapons your country would be a lot safer.

    • David Gardiner

      I also live in the UK and completely agree with Amicus. In the United States there are 9.20 gun deaths per 100,000 each year. In the UK there are 0.25 deaths per 100,000. Which society would you prefer to live in and bring up your children in? I'm sorry but your pro-gun arguments seem to me ridiculous. There will always be mentally ill people, and just plain bad people for that matter. The easier it is for them to get hold of killing machines and the more efective those killing machines are the more people they are going to kill. That's common sense. Make it more difficult for people to get access to the means to kill on an industrial scale. It isn't rocket science, surely?

      • RedWhiteAndJew

        Comparing one social milieu with another, and ignoring all other factors other than the one which tickles your pet theory of the moment, is only an exercise in prejudice reinforcement. It is such thinking which motivates some racists to point to Somalia and conclude that blacks are savages.

        In the social sciences, it is usually impossible to hold other variables constant, but when you can make temporal comparisons using largely the same sample set you will get much closer to the truth of how a specific change effects a system, rather than looking at a completely different system. In the UK, violent crime has been sharply increasing, since the ownership of most firearms has been banned. The same goes for Australia.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "In the social sciences, it is usually impossible to hold other variables constant"

          It's a lot MORE complicated than "rocket science." We know we can get to the moon. We don't know any clear way to achieve the delusions we hear from the left, and neither do they. They're tyrants who deny the complexity of anything they want to avoid thinking about. They're like magicians who want to be treated like scientists.

      • NAHALKIDES

        A comparison of "gun deaths" is not really meaningful. For one thing, suicide should not be lumped together with murder. I'm sorry if someone wants to kill himself, but there's no reason the fact that some people will commit suicide should be considered a justification for depriving the rest of us of our right to self-defense. For another, the murder rate in Britain was lower than America's even when guns were legal there. Obviously other factors are in play – we're two very different societies.

        Finally, you ask "Which society would you prefer to live in and bring up your children in?" That's easy – America. You Britons are no longer a free people, in part because you have been disarmed by those who now rule you. The master is armed; the slave is not. When those who govern have guns, they are the masters and those they govern, bereft of arms, are the slaves. You may not realize that yet, but your nation, along with the rest of Western Europe, is already a "soft tyranny". The tragedy is not that we're different from you; it's that we're becoming too much like you.

      • colley

        other countries with stronger gun control laws than the United States, such as Russia, Brazil and Mexico. All of these countries have higher murder rates than the United States. So Britain is not the best example to use, in fact it had low crime even when guns were readily available there.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "other countries with stronger gun control laws than the United States, such as Russia, Brazil and Mexico. All of these countries have higher murder rates than the United States. So Britain is not the best example to use, in fact it had low crime even when guns were readily available there."

          Just wait till the jihadis are done using them and things get more openly hostile and violent. They'll wish they had guns, like Americans have the right to have. I wonder what the statistics are for gun or other deadly weapon ownership among Muslims in the UK, or anywhere else in the West for that matter in those countries with strict "gun control" laws?

          What a bunch of deluded fools. "Visualize world peace." Fine, but don't be stupid about it.

      • factonly

        There are only 3.2 gun deaths per 100,000 per year in the US as of 2011. In 1993 there were 6.6 per 100,000. More people own guns today then they did in 1993. Do the math and get the facts straight. Gun deaths in this country are not usually caused by law abiding gun owners, they belong to criminals who have no respect for the law and have obtained illegally those firearms. Therefor, when you take away the law abiding citizens right to own a gun, the only ones that have them are the criminals.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "I also live in the UK and completely agree with Amicus. In the United States there are 9.20 gun deaths per 100,000 each year. In the UK there are 0.25 deaths per 100,000. Which society would you prefer to live in and bring up your children in? I'm sorry but your pro-gun arguments seem to me ridiculous. "

        Do you live anywhere close to any "sharia zone?"

        I understand there are sincere people who think as you do, but you're eyes are not opened wide enough. You're partially if not wholly deluded about the issue and the world and what has been happening.

        "The easier it is for them to get hold of killing machines and the more efective those killing machines are the more people they are going to kill. That's common sense"

        So common that it doesn't really make any relevant point. You can't un-ring a bell, which is to say you can't press a button or implement some policy that will achieve what you expect it to. Did it occur to you that failure at implementing your suggestions might make things worse?

        We understand your points. You don't understand the complexities of the real world and the ability of any national or federal government to regulate criminals.

        The USA was founded on many ideals, and one of the most important was distribution of power. Grabbing guns is a power grab at the federal level. Given how poorly they've handled almost everything, we don't trust them to achieve their goals. Can you understand that? There is nobody here who would argue against a plan that would clearly be successful to eliminate or reduce violence, or victims of violence. We're saying that their approach is wrong and their arguments are deliberately (in many cases) too simple because they are not after a reduction in violence, They are after an increase in power of the federal government, especially when leftists can shape any changes. They truly believe they can create an evolved federal government superior to any other government and any other society in history. They are deluded. and you've been partially infected by their delusions. I love to work towards true progress. It's my life work. Everything I do is about progress, but not as defined by the political left. What I say all the time is that they are deluded, because that is the fundamental dispute. I don't mind their ideas as long as they recognize the limits of those ideas. Sadly, it is almost universal that on the left, they expect to lead with ideas and work out the realities "later." You can't be a leftist if you sit in a disciplined way to test the realities of your ideas before propagating them. That is the true definition of conservative: Work on progress without destroying things in your way, and test your ideas rationally and practically before trying to promote them as "better."

        Think about that for a bit before repeating arguments you already had in your mind. Respond to what I actually said if you want to have a constructive conversation.

        "It isn't rocket science, surely?"

        Managing change like you suggest in today's global society is infinitely more complicated than rocket science, and you treat it like child's play.

    • steve

      Not living in USA you dont know the WHOLE story there are checks regarding weapons through the FBI, local PD and NCIC. So its the disturbed that dont get medical or psychiatric attention they need. So here ARE checks and still unsuitable and unstable individuals that get a hold of weapons or other devices …whether its guns,knives ,cars, trucks, bombs etc etc etc and all that crap is still legal !! SO ITS THE liberaL MOVEMENT TO DISARM THE WHOLE OF THE AMERICAN LAW ABIDING CITIZENS. DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT WIL SOLVE THE PROBLEM? Think about it before you offer your opinion from afar.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

      If only criminals gave us the time and the schedule so all that could be arranged beforehand.

      Guns are not toys, they are serious measures for serious reasons.
      And if the teachers had guns that seriously deranged criminal could have been stopped.

    • tagalog

      In America, guns are not sold over the counter without checks. The federal agency, BATF (it has another letter in the acronym now, but I forget what it is) exercises strict oversight of gun sales and gun dealers.

      Except when it comes to the U.S. Department of Justice forcing the private sale of firearms to Mexican drug dealers. Then there's no oversight whatsoever.

      The vast majority of American gun owners are well aware of the dangers that guns pose. It's the crazies and the criminals who disregard the dangers (or knowingly profit from those dangers by threatening others). Most Americans are responsible about firearms. It's the people who no law will ever touch who are dangerous with firearms.

    • John

      Actually, I rather live in Switzerland than the UK. They have no problem with gun ownership, and are mostly homogeneous. Diversification, and political correctness, have created a situation where Britain is no longer all that British. London certainly isn't.
      By the way, you also have a serious problem with public drunkeness. Have you considered outlawing alcohol? Try it. You'll find out it doesn't work either.

    • JacksonPearson

      "I do not live in the USA"
      Then you do not understand our Constitution, Amendments, and especially the Bill of Rights. The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, of "the right to own and bear arms," was a guarantee specifically placed in there at the insistence of the American citizenry. Because an unarmed society has been historically proven to be dog meat to an oppressive government. The people and the founding fathers knew this to be fact. In spite, and despite of the rant by advocates for gun control, our courts have upheld the 2nd Amendment, verbatim.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "Then you do not understand our Constitution, Amendments, and especially the Bill of Rights. "

        They don't need guns because they expect the USA to save them, but if the Islamic jihadis or delusional leftists destroy the USA, who's to stop any belligerent from marching in to any defense-weak population and taking over?

        The USA is exceptional and must be treated that way, and they'd be better off emulating us rather than imagining now that they can do better. What gives them that delusion? By what measure is the UK superior to the USA? Only by superficial analysis of selected crime statistics. Statistics can be abused to serve almost any lie.

        • JacksonPearson

          As I commented on another thread regarding the 2nd Amendment, General George Washington didn't use his First Amendment Rights to defeat the British, he shot them. I honestly believe that little phrase covers a large spectrum of American Constitution whys and wherefores of what had to be fought for.

          Incidents like Sandy Hook school, Columbine, Fort Hood etc, are shootings that are stains on a free nation like ours. However, many world wide marvel at our country, and it's Constitution and would do anything to get here to live in a free society, just to be able to cling to a Bible, and gun.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "I honestly believe that little phrase covers a large spectrum of American Constitution whys and wherefores of what had to be fought for. "

            I'll interpret that for you. We don't need others to agree with us when we protect ourselves from them. We explain our theories when we should, but it's not always required. Most of the time, the courts are there for us to use, but if those fail, we don't have to give up there.

            In that sense, the US constitution is also a warning to those who might pursue tyrannical modes of leadership.

    • mlcblog

      Maybe you should mind your own business then. We are living in the wild west, where only fools go out unarmed and send their children to dangerous schools where there is no protection. We need marshals of some sort who can take these crazies out plus citizens carrying guns so they can take out the shooter before he does more harm. That is what stops these crazies.

      Also we need to reinstitute the lockup procedures we used to have for those who are obviously deranged and freaking people out for good reason.

  • WildJew

    Chuck Schumer, one of the most anti-gun Senators in Washington D.C., obtained a permit to carry for self-defense.
    https://www.facebook.com/steven.jorgensen.94/post

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      Perfectly consistent with leftists' hypocrisy.

      • Galveston

        just like rosie o'donnell that fat behemoth who wanted guns banned only to be exposed as a fraud with an armed bodyguard.

  • blackburnian

    Exactly who are the lunatics? After every massacre the gun-nut right-wing, in chorus, apologize for the murderer while extolling the sanctimony of the 2nd amendment. Thanks to this attitude and the efforts of the NRA we are all but guaranteed future rampages. That is the very definition of lunacy. On the issue of gun-control the right are truly sick and sickening.

    • amicus101

      I agree. I am sure they are all good people, but they seem to have a moral blind spot where this issue is concerned.

      • Headed4TheHills

        It's strange, you know. We have a few firearms in our house and they have never hurt anyone. The stay in their gun cabinet, peacefully minding their own business, thinking their firearmy thoughts I suppose. We also have multiple stores in our area that sell firearms. I shop at one frequently. You know something? Not one of those firearms has ever threatened me or my family, which includes six grandchildren. They haven't fired at us as we passed by, nor gone on a rampage and taken one of us out. Regardless of how much anti-gun Nazis scream how dangerous those evil guns are, we've been safe around them all this time. However, I know what evil rests in the hearts of MEN (mankind people, not just the male portion of the population). They can pick up almost anything and use it to kill me and / or one of my precious children.
        So, if you anti-gun Progressive Liberals (even the ones who say they are Conservatives in other areas) don't want to own a firearm, by all means, don't. I plan to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights and keep and bear arms.
        One last thought for you "Holier than Thou" "Morally Superior" Liberals out there: One could be murdered by a hammer blow to the cranium. Is the hammer evil? No, the evil rests solely with the person who wielded that hammer. Nor are guns inherently evil. The evil, the crime,the hate, the murderous intent is not in the gun but in the person holding it.
        This rant brought to you by a Law Abiding Citizen Gun Owner of America.I now return you to your regularly scheduled day.

        • amicus101

          I think you rather miss the point. Are you a member of a "well regulated militia" by the way?

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            The militia is the whole people. George Mason has my back on this.

            http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/arms.html

            As to "regulation:" Are you conversant with the fact that, at the time of the Constitution's writing, British English was still a significant linguistic influence on the language of the founders? Do you know what a "regular" is, in this context?

          • amicus101

            Well. It's your country. Carry on with the killing and have a nice Christmas.

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            I have done no killing.

            Also, in reply to your snide benediction, I'll also say, I'm a Jew.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Well. It's your country. Carry on with the killing and have a nice Christmas."

            I hope mommy gives you nice gifts.

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            And speaking of points, what is the point, then?

          • amicus101

            My point was that gun owners need to be responsible people and that guns should not be sold without strict regulation. Checks are vital if weapons are not to fall into the wrong hands.

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            I see. Well, in that case, it's a point without a point. We have many laws pertaining to guns. We also have laws against murder.

            The fact is, the lawless, by definition, do not obey the law. That's why it's a good idea to be armed.

          • LibertarianToo

            Have you ever heard of the Brady Law? Kinda crucial if you want to participate in a debate on this topic.

          • Mo_

            "gun owners need to be responsible people"

            By and large, they are.

            " and that guns should not be sold without strict regulation."

            We have them.

            Criminals, by definition, do not obey laws.

      • Mo_

        Projection, much?

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "Projection, much?"

          Communist indoctrination is so evil and virulent. They actually program these people to project their own flaws, so that when someone points this out, it sounds like a child's argument even when it it the most salient true fact. Deluded people going around accusing other people of delusion are difficult to wake up from their own delusions.

          Whatever evil helped develop leftist propaganda and tactics over the years is not always lacking in cunning.

          • Mo_

            I couldn't agree more.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "I agree. I am sure they are all good people, but they seem to have a moral blind spot where this issue is concerned."

        To paraphrase others, tyrants always deny complexity. You're serving the tyrants and then calling us partially blind? At least you tried to flatter us first.

        I'm sure your thinking has been corrupted by leftist indoctrination, but you're no doubt otherwise a good person. It's nearly impossible to live in the UK without being corrupted by leftism. Sneeze while staring in the wrong direction and you'll be jailed for racism.

        You can keep that perfect society you've managed to build. That's one good reason why we parted ways a bit more than a few centuries ago. The issues are related. We don't need a king or a federal government designing our future society. We want a society that works as well or better than the one we already have working well now for more than 2 centuries.

    • Headed4TheHills

      No, blackburnian, the definition of lunacy is: 1. Insanity, especially insanity relieved intermittently by periods of clear-mindedness. See Synonyms at insanity. 2. a. Great or wild foolishness. b. A wildly foolish act. 3. Archaic Intermittent mental derangement associated with the changing phases of the moon.

      But, giving you the benefit of the doubt (apparently something you are unable to do for anyone who has a different opinion than yours), I will take the opposing viewpoint. Lunacy is having laws permitting the wholesale slaughter of innocent children (45 million+) and calling it Freedom of Choice but denying that same type of free choice when someone doesn't want to pay union dues and cheering as Union members go on violent rampages. Lunacy is stooping to playground-level tactics such as name calling when someone differs in their viewpoint (as some are called knuckle-draggin' Bible-thumpin' gun-totin' bigoted racist homophobic by the Liberal Progressives) but preaching tolerance for others.

      So, my dear blackburnian, should you wish to have a meaningful dialog concerning the rights of others and the pros and cons of gun ownership, please feel free to return and post at future intervals. If not, then I am sure you will be able to live up to the Liberal Progressive standard and spew vitriol at me and others who don't happen to agree with you.

      You have a nice day now, you hear.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "…the definition of lunacy is: 1. Insanity, especially insanity relieved intermittently by periods of clear-mindedness. "

        Like praying to the moon 5 times a day with your butt pointed in the air, or similar insane behavior like empowering totalitarian religions dedicated to one's own death.

        "3. Archaic Intermittent mental derangement associated with the changing phases of the moon. "

        Allah akbar? Cheese and crackers anyone? I'll host after we knock over the next caravan fully of booty.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      After every massacre the gun-nut right-wing, in chorus, apologize for the murderer…

      Projective name calling aside, skippy, who is apologizing for the murderer, because I missed it. The only one responsible for the murder, is the murderer. Although in this case, it appears a system intended to protect us from the mentally ill dragged its heels. So, I suppose some blame may also be laid at the government's feet due to this.

    • Mo_

      "Exactly who are the lunatics? "

      People such as yourself, who claim that it's the right-wing who are apologizing for the murderer.

    • tagalog

      I'd be more sympathetic to your point of view if it weren't for the fact that a lot of these shootings are carried out by people who are crazy.

      In the U.S., we have a case, the Donaldson case, from the 1970s, that says a mentally ill person can't be committed to a psychiatric facility, even for a 72-hour period of observation, unless the mentally ill person consents to the commitment, or is found to be "dangerous to self or others." Consent will be difficult to obtain from most homicidal maniacs. How does one find out if a person who can't be observed is dangerous? You know the answer: they have to be display some unmistakably dangerous conduct. That is, until the Holmes person shoots up the theater or the Lanza guy kills the children, he's not demonstrably dangerous.

      • tagalog

        But it's deemed constitutionally impermissible to deprive a person of his liberty just because he's disturbed and has shown no potential for violence. Yet some of such people DO indeed become murderously dangerous, as we know.

        Yet, constricting the Second Amendment so as to limit the expressly-acknowledged freedom of people, nearly all of whom are especially law-abiding, to own firearms, constrictions that will be permanent, is deemed by some to be acceptable. Why is that?

        If we balance the right to freedom of a small population of disturbed people for a short term of days so that they can be evaluated for their violent propensities against the right of hundreds of millions of Americans to enjoy their express right to keep and bear arms, where do we come out? For most, at least up to now, the former is more important than the latter. But now I think the latter is more important, just in terms of numbers and duration of loss of liberty. I think most Americans who are not overwhelmed emotionally agree with me.

        We live in a society where liberty is rapidly dying. It would be a good idea to slow down the erosion of liberty for as many people as possible.

    • Ghostwriter

      What blackburnian and amicus101 seem to forget is that no one on the right has no sympathy for the murderous sack of garbage Lanza. In my opinion,there's a special place in Hades for people who murder children,especially in the hideous manner that Adam Lanza did. And I hope it's exceedingly excruciating for him. He deserves it.

    • Mary Sue

      Spoken like one of the truly Officially Clueless.

    • LibertarianToo

      No, you mean sanctity. Sanctimony is the president's specialty.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Exactly who are the lunatics?"

      Got a mirror?

  • Mike

    Amicus–I work in a place where we sell AR's and believe me there is a back ground check on persons buying guns. I don't know where you got your info but next time do some research before you speak. Also, that gun was stolen from the owner by the user and was used in a wreckless and irresponsible way.

  • κατεργάζομαι

    Chief Inspector Dreyfus: "Every day, in every way, we are getting Cloward-Piven-ier & Cloward Piven-ier…..isn't that correct Clouseau?" - – (eye twitch)

    To paraphrase Mark Levin; "I would rather live where the citizens are armed to the teeth, than a country where only the government is armed." ~ America is racing toward the later.

    Thinking heads knew that Obama would seize the first opportunity to initiate Gun Control, it is just that no one expected him to do so before he was innagurated into a second term.

    Meanwhile the elected GOP Politicians do their "YESSIMS Mr. President, sir…." shuffle, as America Circles the Drain into the Cloward Piven Abyss.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "To paraphrase Mark Levin; "I would rather live where the citizens are armed to the teeth, than a country where only the government is armed." ~ America is racing toward the later. "

      That's a great opening and closing statement, because in the end, that is the entire argument.

  • STEVE CHAVEZ

    TWO WORDS OMITTED FROM THE CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS: "BUT AND EXCEPT."

    Obama and his "Circle of Communists" want to add these words to every "Freedom" like "Freedom of Speech except you cannot speak ill of Mohammad, Allah, Islam, and Muslims or you will lawfully be beheaded."

    "Freedom of Assembly except if the group are those Tea Party sons-a-bit*hes!"

  • logdon

    I'm in general agreement with the other British commentators on the UK/US comparison statistics regarding fire arm homicide. After all, facts are facts.

    However if facts are the be all and end all, explain this……

    Gun crime soars by 35% | Mail Online http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime... – Similarto Gun crime soars by 35% | Mail Online Home Office statistics showed gun crime has soared by nearly 600% since 1978 … crime proved that strong measures against guns following the Dunblane …

    Gun crimes soaring despite ban brought in following Dunblane … http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1334043/Gun-crime.... – Similarto Gun crimes soaring despite ban brought in following Dunblane …
    15 Jul 2001 … The figures will renew the debate about the effectiveness of the gun ban, … "The increase in the use of handguns by criminals since the …

    Gun crime rises despite Dunblane pistol ban – Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1334274/Gun-crime.... – Similarto Gun crime rises despite Dunblane pistol ban – Telegraph

    17 Jul 2001 … HANDGUN crime increased by 40 per cent in the two years after the ban imposed because of the Dunblane massacre, according to a new …

    BBC News | UK | Handgun crime 'up' despite ban
    news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm – Similarto BBC News | UK | Handgun crime 'up' despite ban
    16 Jul 2001 … The criminal use of handguns has risen since they were outlawed in … Handguns were banned following the Dunblane massacre … the highest levels of legally held guns only two had armed crime levels above the average.

    So whilst it becomes clear that us Brits do not generally resort to guns as an adjunct to crime or argument solving it's also clear that a ban on guns serves no purpose whatsoever. It's obvious that other factors are at play here but that doesn't stop a kneejerk media and political offensive designed more out of gloating hubris than any form of goodwill.

    Then there's Obama's hypocrisy.

    'During his time teaching at the University of Chicago, he told then-colleague John Lott point-blank: “I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.” et al

    Meanwhile……

    'Obama approved F-16 fighter jets as gift to Egypt'……
    http://rt.com/usa/news/obama-fighter-jets-egypt-8

    So according to this, Obama would disarm American citizens yet would arm an anti-western and hostile entity which openly vows to rule the entire globe not with a few Glocks but one of the most lethal fighting machines ever.

    This is the warped landscape in which we dwell.

    • Fred R.

      Thank you logdon. Your post was both factual and logical.

      Fred R.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "So according to this, Obama would disarm American citizens yet would arm an anti-western and hostile entity which openly vows to rule the entire globe not with a few Glocks but one of the most lethal fighting machines ever. "

      It's clearly part of the same agenda.

  • Capt_Z1

    Because he is anti-American and would like nothing more than have his mouslem brothers take over this great country and make him the great leader of the world

  • Spider

    Banning or heavily restricting guns will only create a black market for them. They will flow over the borders just like all the junk that's poisoning our kids. And truely as has been warned many times -only the bad guys will have guns. The gun banners better hope they don't get what they wish for or a hell will be unleashed here like none other. America will become like Mexico where organized criminals essentially run the country.

    • Tanner

      And the ones currently bought and owned by Americans are the safer option in that scenario.

      The black market would bring in the really nasty stuff. When it's illegal to own guns of any kind, anyone who is in the market has no reason not to go for the full-auto Soviet Bloc AKs. Or the full-auto M16s, M4s, and FALs sold to the Mexican military and police by the US State Dept and subsequently sold to -or stolen by- the Mexican cartels and gangs.

      • Spider

        Yep – prohibition creates organized crime and gangs mayhem and murder

  • melvin polatnick

    The constitutional right to bear arms should be granted to all American citizens, but all those that use that weapon to kill should be sent to prison for five years. Defending one’s life or killing an innocent neighbor would both be considered as equal behavior in the eyes of the law. Lesser punishment should be given to those that only caused a wound, a five thousand dollar fine plus court costs would act as a deterrent. The choice is open to a person about to be murdered, accept death or kill and serve five years in prison. But it is also possible to wound the aggressor and pay a 5000 dollar fine. Both parties involved are innocent victims of circumstances and there is no justification for taking a life.

    • dmw

      Yes, nonsense. We (in America) already have a sufficient gradation of laws from Assault, to Battery, to Manslaughter, to Murder and gradations within each of those categories. We do not use cookie cutter approaches to dealing with errant INDIVIDUALS. We let the discretion of District/State Attorneys and Grand Juries (of peers) determine specific charges and, unless there is a VOLUNTARY plea deal negotiated, we let empaneled Juries (of peers) decide guilt or acquittal. Lastly, when a person might be found guilty or acquitted in a criminal court, they can also be sued in civil court for damages (see O.J. Simpson). Then there's appeals. Insuring and enforcing rights. Lengthy. Messy. Un-Utopian.

    • kafir4life

      I'm hopeful that if you are confronted by a criminal with a gun that you slap him silly with your open hand. To hit him with your fist is assault, and you should be charged as such. Oh….right…..He'll have a gun, so you probably won't be charged. While he's raping your wife, mother, sister….you should wag a finger at him, and say STOP THAT. But not too loud. That's disorderly conduct.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "…but all those that use that weapon to kill should be sent to prison for five years."

      Due process? We don't need no stinking due process. We've got the plans for a perfect society. You won't need any rights that we don't give you. Trust me.

    • JacksonPearson

      "there is no justification for taking a life."

      Okay, in your opine, what do you believe should be done to doctors that do abortions, or with people that manage abortion clinics where the murdering is being done?

  • RedWhiteAndJew

    Stuff and nonsense, the lot.

    Well, except for the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, of course.

  • NAHALKIDES

    You obviously don't follow conservative thought very closely if you think that. None of us EVER "apologize for the murderer" – WE'RE the ones who insist that individuals are responsible for their actions. Except in cases of the dangerously insane, whom we believe should be locked up but your side believes should roam free. Then when one of these human time bombs goes off and kills someone with a gun, you shout "We need gun control!" instead of "We were wrong. These kinds of people should be confined so this doesn't happen again."

  • pierce

    AntiGun Lunatics include Barack Obama , and Hilary Clinton. But they are not lunatics, not really, they are just AntiGunners, who just happen to follow the UN mandate. Well, that is just fine, if you back some of the wacko countries of this planet. The USA is not a wacko country, but it has a few wackos that inhabit the hinterlands. That is still no reason to ban guns/handguns, because of a few nuts. Let us get real.

  • Moishe Pupick

    W., 12/19/12

    The very use of the expression "gun violence" is a linguistic ploy. Intellectual honesty requires one to say instead "criminal violence with guns." The inanimate object is thereby demonized instead of the evil person who misuses that inanimate object. If at least 1 teacher or administrator in the school had been armed with a loaded gun and used it to kill Lanza, that gun violence would not have been criminal. However, this linguistic distinction is of no importance to the dumbed-down members of the Victim Disarmament Movement and the politicians who support them.
    (Of course, some of those politicians themselves pack concealed heat, but it's like Piglet says in Orwell's ANIMAL FARM, "All creatures are created equal but some more equal than others.")

  • Western Spirit

    To quote Archie Bunker "Would you rather they pushed him out of a winder little girl?"

    There all kinds of ways to end life—set loose an epidemic in a school for instance, something the Islamists are capable of doing.

    But we are bending over backwards not to offend them even though that's not the problem. The problem is we don't believe what they believe and they can't tolerate that. And the "tolerant" Left is protecting this intolerance of the Islamists is the reason why we aren't protecting ourselves adequately or even naming our problem with Islamists.

    The answer lies with preventing unstable people from getting their hands on guns. Period. Not with the gun.
    The Left is attributing the problem to getting rid of guns because that suits their purposes.

    Purposes that also coincides with the Left protecting the intolerance of Islamists. the Left doesn't care about guns or tolerance. The Left only cares about destroying this country and doing so without problems from the people of this country —once they've been disarmed.

    Say it like it is and maybe we'll get through to the deluded. Say it like it is!

    • Mary Sue

      IIRC the exchange went like this:
      "Did you know that every year (x number) of people are moidered by handguns?"
      "Would it make you feel any better, liddle goil, if dey was pushed outta windas?"

      Funny how the Left would rather regulate guns than crazy people…oh wait OOPS that means they'd have to lock themselves up! ;)

  • BS77

    Guns and gun violence are but the symptom of a deeper social disorder….namely our Orwellian culture. Young boys are put on extremely dangerous psychiatric drugs . I read that some 90% of the mass shooters were on some type of psychiatric drugs…..These miserable kids and young adults remain isolated instead of being included. These kids are permitted to play the most hideous video games, permitted to be entertained with some of the most vile garbage Hollywood can produce. Working parents spend little time with their children….schools are now conditioning centers for a genderless, Godless, PC agenda. Gone are the days where music, art, shop and home economics were standard classes. School prayer is unknown any longer. Any kids who cannot conform to the norms..are soon marginalized and put on Prozac etc etc and are segregated from the mainstream. Many have very poor nutrition. They may subsist on .junk food, fast food and sugar. Diagnoses of ADHD, autism, various syndromes and behavioral disorders and prescribed powerful psychiatric drugs have replaced loving and compassionate care. Many of these kids come from one parent homes, have little or no spiritual content in their lives………How many of these kids do farm chores, attend church or have scouting, crafts or music as part of their upbringing?

    • BS77

      Oh, one more thing…..say a prayer for the famlies who have had to endure this terrible event….it is worse than a tragedy….When I saw the firemen from NY in attendance for the funeral of the 7 year old boy….I lost it. Pray for the community of Newtown.

    • Questions

      Your screen name is appropriate. I watch movies regularly and am none the more violent for it. This murderous creep in Connecticut didn't kill because he saw a movie starring Bruce Willis, Liam Neeson or Sylvester Stallone. Tens of millions of do that. He killed because he had terrible social skills, Asperger's Syndrome and a complete inability to listen to or learn from others.

      There is absolutely no sound scientific evidence — none — that watching a "violent" movie or playing a video game makes someone violent.

      • UCSPanther

        Blaming Asperger's is a terrible idea as well. 99.999% of people who have it are harmless, law abiding and the vast majority are active and contributing members of society.

        There are other factors at play in this murderer's choice to commit such a heinous act.

      • Ghostwriter

        I've watched my fair share of violent stuff including anime. Didn't make me want to kill people. And UCSPanther is right. The majority as Asperger's sufferers aren't violent people. The "person" who did it had a ton of screws loose in his head.

        • Mary Sue

          Yeah, there's a ton of "co-morbid" disorders that can appear alongside Aspergers (including Borderline Personality Disorder) which would be more likely to be the cause.

      • BS77

        Perhaps you are correct. I don't know. I am not an expert in personality disorders…but I think some of the movies and video games are negative for most children under 10….If I am wrong….I accept that.
        I wouldn't want my child to play violent video games or watch all these horrible zombie films etc

        • Ghostwriter

          If I had any kids,I'd have the exact same stance as you.

    • UCSPanther

      I have played Quake, Doom, Descent, Half Life, etc., still occasionally play them and I like shooting, owning and collecting guns. By that reasoning, and the reasoning of the hoplophobes, I would be one of the most dangerous men around.

      This was the same reasoning that occurred after Columbine, when people, encouraged by the now-disgraced activist lawyer Jack Thompson, tried to sue video game developers. All of those suits were thrown out.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      Guns are not a symptom of social disorder.

  • stazione

    Imagine all guns were banned completely. Then those tunnels on the Mexican border would be used to smuggle guns in. Those submarines that Cartels use to bring drugs north could now carry guns. It would be like "prohibition" all over again. Even the most law-abiding citizen might decide he or she needs a gun, if violence increases in his neighborhood.
    Oddly enough, despite strong gun restrictions in Britain after the Dunblane massacre of children, there is substantial gun crime there.

  • Mike

    I would like to know how many anti-gun people on this page are pro-abortion? Over 50 million babies have been murdered over the past 40-50 years. Where is your outrage over that? I think you left-wing nuts live in an unrealistic world.

    • Soider

      Yes – More babies have been murdered just in the USA alone than all the people shot or gassed by Hitlers Germany. Think about it.

    • Mary Sue

      b-b-but, if women couldn't murder their own unborn babies, it means some Man (Republican) is running her life! [/sarcasm]

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      It's perfectly consistent for the anti-gun nuts to be abortophilic. In both cases, the victims of their pogroms can't fight back.

      They're cowards.

  • edgineer1

    Put the blame squarely where it belongs, the Democratic Party. They were behind the overthrow of commitment laws and closing mental asylums in the 1970s. Thanks to the Democrats the entire country has become one big asylum. And Democrats insist these mentally deranged people have civil rights, including the right to buy guns. The innocent blood of the murdered children is on the hands of the Democrats and their supporters.

    • Carbondioxide

      According to reports Democrats also promoted the voting of busloads of the mentally deficient not to be confused with the hordes of "Low Information Voters" who I guess were able find their way to the polls under their own power. Considering the quality of the input to the voting process, what does that say about the quality of the outcome? The election of 2012 echoed the acronym from the bygone days of analog computers "GIGO" (garbage in garbage out).

  • Duke

    I dont buy the label mentally ill. As any good family therapist will explain, its easier to hide behind this label
    as opposed to taking responsibility for ones life and actions.

    The killer had classic mother/son drama and when she decided he was "crazy" and made moves to put him in an institution, he decided to show how "crazy" he was…
    Mentally ill? Nonsense. He knew exactly what he was doing.
    He planned this well and sadly pulled it off.

    Maybe if he had seen the 10 commandments posted in school or somewhere else during his formative years he would have thought about it.

    ACLU is at fault

  • Anamah

    Reality is taking unrealistic shapes.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      Meaning?

  • James Summers

    A short quote from a late member of the human race.. This year will go down in history..For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration.. Our streets will be safer,and our police will be more in control and the world will follow our lead in the future..
    This quote could be credited to Mann–Metzebaum–Schumer–Hillary or any of our anti-gun people. But at that time in history this man was not so well known–but later to become well known and most infamous–
    The man who made that statement was Adolph Hitler..Need we say more….

  • James Summers

    A great civilization cannot be destroyed from without, Until it is first destroyed from within…
    Durant

  • Carbondioxide

    In a way that might be some comfort to know Schumer was able to get a gun. He also defies Barry in doing that. There is good reason, given what is in the news of the protected classes might be only the tip of the iceberg, to suspect many in the US Government could not pass even a barebones firearms background check. Bill Clinton could not have heated a bowl of soup in a submarine galley with his background, and I suspect since then security checks have become a phoned-in formality since the executive branch with all of its Muslim/Marxist/Progressive radical ties and backgrounds would melt under actual national security clearance check criteria.

  • Carbondioxide

    In a way that might be some comfort to know Schumer was able to get a gun. He also defies Barry in doing that. There is good reason, given what is in the news of the protected classes might be only the tip of the iceberg, to suspect many in the US Government could not pass even a barebones firearms background check. Bill Clinton could not have heated a bowl of soup in a submarine galley with his background, and I suspect since then security checks have become a phoned-in formality since the executive branch with all of its Muslim/Marxist/Progressive radical ties and backgrounds would melt under actual national security clearance check criteria.

  • biblestudyspacecom

    Godless Liberals Promote Violent Movies, Rap Music and Video Games

    Godless Liberal Mass Shooters

    Obama and Gov. Cuomo will use guns to keep their children safe, but our kids get kill by their Godless Liberal mass shooters they create. Obama democrats and the mainstream media are the ones destroying the kids in this nation. The mass shooters right now are coming from the Godless liberal families. They love Violent Hollywood films about senseless murder and mayhem. Godless Liberal love violent Rap music, video games and MTV Secularism that is turning your sons into gangsters and daughters into whores. But they don't want to stop the violent Rap music and video games the children play. They don't want to stop the MTV Secularism, they don't want to stop the media figures who help create Godless Liberal mass shooters. Godless Liberal like Jon Stewart, David Letterman, Bill Maher and the Godless liberal mainstream media. So how do the Godless liberal leaders and mainstream media want to stop the mass shootings? Gun control and gun confiscation, because we don't need guns to keep our children safe.

    The new Godless Liberal leaders like Gov. Cuomo passed gun control laws, that gives the state power to confiscate firearms. Gov Cuomo promotes the homosexual agenda, and mandate acceptance of homosexuality to children in the New York schools. Gov. Cuomo who marched in the NYC Gay Parade, with the North American Man/Boy Love Pedophile Groups. Gov. Cuomo who promotes the MTV Secularism and homosexual agenda, that is destroying the children in public schools.

    Obama's Department of Education is still destroying the Bible believing Christians in public schools. According to the Department of Education, Bible believing Christians are not living in a reality-based environment. Because they believe the Bible is the Word of God, so they secretly use school counselors and school staff to destroy their faith. When will the mainstream media hate speech against Christians stop. CNN hosts Erin Burnett and John Avlon said that many Christians are bigots, and the Holy Bible has more Hateful statements than Koran. How many more Christians mush die around the world, before the Obama bigots stop the hate speech against Christians.

    Over 150,000 Christians were killed last year for their faith, between 200 million and 250 million of them face daily threats of murder, beating, imprisonment and torture. China continues to ship pastors and Christians to prison every year. In Saudi Arabia, the only faith permitted by law is Islam. Christians are regularly imprisoned and tortured on trumped-up charges of blaspheming or owning religious artifacts. At least 75 per cent of all religious persecution in the world is directed against Christians. Thanks to all the hate speech from the Obama bigots and Mainstream media.

    This show how the godless liberals have destroyed society. Take guns away, and the kids from a godless liberal society will use bombs, acid, poison, clubs, knives, and fire. Laws that disarm people who would defend children from mass murderers are immoral. We’ve done the experiment, gun free zones are killing zones for godless liberal mass shooters.